empacher riggers - someone can help ???

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by Ken » Fri, 29 Jun 2001 05:31:05


I am purchasing a boat from empacher, but I am not sure on what type of
rigger to order.
Empacher seem to have 3 different type of rigger,
conventional, aluminum wing rigger and carbon wing rigger.
I know Derek Porter had a carbon wing rigger at the Olympics. How does it
compare to other riggers?
The carbon is the most expensive, is it also better ?

I spoke to Bill Mcgowen  ( US representative for empacher) and told me that
empacher improved a lot on the carbon wing in recent years.

Thats all I know and its not much

hope someone can help in making my decision

 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by Trevor Chamber » Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:49:28

Quote:

> I am purchasing a boat from empacher, but I am not sure on what type of
> rigger to order.
> Empacher seem to have 3 different type of rigger,
> conventional, aluminum wing rigger and carbon wing rigger.
> I know Derek Porter had a carbon wing rigger at the Olympics. How does it
> compare to other riggers?
> The carbon is the most expensive, is it also better ?

> I spoke to Bill Mcgowen  ( US representative for empacher) and told me that
> empacher improved a lot on the carbon wing in recent years.

> Thats all I know and its not much

> hope someone can help in making my decision

When I first saw an Empacher wing-rigged 1x, it had a terribly clunkly clumsy
looking Al rigger (to my mind), and that put me right off wing-riggers as a
concept. In recent years I've got more used to the idea, and will probably go
for one when/if I change boats (currently have conventional 3 stay Al riggers).

I have seen an Empacher carbon wing-rigger and like it...I want one! Porter had
backstays on his but the couple I have seen on the domestic circuit (Docklands
and Henley women's, in the UK) didn't bother.

If you've seen a Staemphli, the Empacher wing is not as deep or "Darth Vader"
like, edges are a bit more right-angledr rather than the rounded bulbous
profile of the Staemphli. I have heard a theory about wing-rigged boats being a
pain because they take-off off trestles if not tied down, and someone with a
Staemphli complaining about cross-winds catching the rigger and lifting one
side of the boat more than a conventional rigger, but on the other hand there
is argument about being better in headwind/rough water as the rigger is higher
and less likely to catch waves.

I'd buy the carbon rigged R scull, and may well do so myself...

Trevor

Sudbury RC

 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by Ken » Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:43:10

Thanks for the input. I also heard that all the force is being  funneled
into one parte of the boat and that force is being applied more horizontally
then the conventionnal rigger.
Also, the rigger is higher with makes the point of gravity higher thus
harder to balance.
Thats what i have been told, is that right?
Is one rigger actually better built and gives a more perfermance or is it
just esthetic.

Ken O



Quote:

> > I am purchasing a boat from empacher, but I am not sure on what type of
> > rigger to order.
> > Empacher seem to have 3 different type of rigger,
> > conventional, aluminum wing rigger and carbon wing rigger.
> > I know Derek Porter had a carbon wing rigger at the Olympics. How does
it
> > compare to other riggers?
> > The carbon is the most expensive, is it also better ?

> > I spoke to Bill Mcgowen  ( US representative for empacher) and told me
that
> > empacher improved a lot on the carbon wing in recent years.

> > Thats all I know and its not much

> > hope someone can help in making my decision

> When I first saw an Empacher wing-rigged 1x, it had a terribly clunkly
clumsy
> looking Al rigger (to my mind), and that put me right off wing-riggers as
a
> concept. In recent years I've got more used to the idea, and will probably
go
> for one when/if I change boats (currently have conventional 3 stay Al
riggers).

> I have seen an Empacher carbon wing-rigger and like it...I want one!
Porter had
> backstays on his but the couple I have seen on the domestic circuit
(Docklands
> and Henley women's, in the UK) didn't bother.

> If you've seen a Staemphli, the Empacher wing is not as deep or "Darth
Vader"
> like, edges are a bit more right-angledr rather than the rounded bulbous
> profile of the Staemphli. I have heard a theory about wing-rigged boats
being a
> pain because they take-off off trestles if not tied down, and someone with
a
> Staemphli complaining about cross-winds catching the rigger and lifting
one
> side of the boat more than a conventional rigger, but on the other hand
there
> is argument about being better in headwind/rough water as the rigger is
higher
> and less likely to catch waves.

> I'd buy the carbon rigged R scull, and may well do so myself...

> Trevor

> Sudbury RC


 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by Ruscoe, Mark [LON40:7E58:EXCH » Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:56:51

Aside from the stiffness and any other factors I think there's a serious
safety
issue surrounding some (not all) of the available designs of wing rigger -
the
section of the wing that lies across the boat is quite low over the instep
and
(depending on how you are adjusted in the boat) can prevent proper operation
of the heel restraints to release your feet in the event of a capsize,
unless the
heel restraints are set a lot tighter than the usual amount deemed
acceptible by
race officials. I've had at least one official show surprise at how tight my
heel
restraints are set (although this may in part be a reflection on the general
standard of equipment that they've been checking)- I do have a single with
a wing rigger and didn't realise this point until a while after I had bought
it
(and otherwise the boat is great).

Mark

 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by Ken » Sat, 30 Jun 2001 05:25:15

What type of boat do you own ?
I have been told that there is a vertical movement while rowing, which you
do not have with a conventionnal rigger. Also, empacher wing rigger is not
that popular and also reselling this type of  boat , say in  5 -6 years
could be harder then reselling a conventional rigger, what you think?

ken O



Quote:
> Aside from the stiffness and any other factors I think there's a serious
> safety
> issue surrounding some (not all) of the available designs of wing rigger -
> the
> section of the wing that lies across the boat is quite low over the instep
> and
> (depending on how you are adjusted in the boat) can prevent proper
operation
> of the heel restraints to release your feet in the event of a capsize,
> unless the
> heel restraints are set a lot tighter than the usual amount deemed
> acceptible by
> race officials. I've had at least one official show surprise at how tight
my
> heel
> restraints are set (although this may in part be a reflection on the
general
> standard of equipment that they've been checking)- I do have a single with
> a wing rigger and didn't realise this point until a while after I had
bought
> it
> (and otherwise the boat is great).

> Mark

 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by HourE » Sat, 30 Jun 2001 06:59:48

I am glad to see someone finally discussing this. I brought this up about 2
weeks ago and did not get much help.

I am in the same situation, wing or no wing. On one hand it could be the new
thing and leave old conventional riggers in the dust helping in resale. On the
other hand it might not and your stuck with something nobody wants.

I looked at all the pictures from the World Cup in Sevilla and the majority of
boats were Empachers but I only saw one Carbon Wing.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Empacher is the best deal right now, its
just deciding which model to go with.

Jose

 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by Ken » Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:38:22

I also heard the wing rigger is not as stable,  apparently it bends a little
( lateraly - up and down)  wich the conventional rigger doesn't move at all.
But teh energy is better distributed to the boat with a wing rigger.  Buty
it does not seem to be cathing on. Some companies like hudson  only make
wing rigger.  It would be interesting to see if he still had conventional
rigger if  most of its buyers would still buy wing rigger.
Also teh wing rigger does leave more space and a lower seat because of teh
absent rib

Ken O


Quote:
> I am glad to see someone finally discussing this. I brought this up about
2
> weeks ago and did not get much help.

> I am in the same situation, wing or no wing. On one hand it could be the
new
> thing and leave old conventional riggers in the dust helping in resale. On
the
> other hand it might not and your stuck with something nobody wants.

> I looked at all the pictures from the World Cup in Sevilla and the
majority of
> boats were Empachers but I only saw one Carbon Wing.

> There is no doubt in my mind that the Empacher is the best deal right now,
its
> just deciding which model to go with.

> Jose

 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by HourE » Sat, 30 Jun 2001 14:23:18

I would assume that the Carbon Wing would have less lateral movement than the
conventional rigger.

I figure the lateral movement and stress in a conventional style rigger is on
the actual rib. If you have an older Empacher, there is a good chance you have
changed the rib already because they get soft and break. The older models used
like a 16 ply marine wood, does anyone know what the new ones use?

The carbon wing extends out from the shoe area all the way to the oarlock so
there is probably more room for flex, but I would think the strength of the
Carbon and the backstay would be stronger than the thin rib.

I don't have access to either new Empachers, but I would love to see a test
done similar to Oar Shaft stiffness tests. Support the hull and hang a desired
weight from the pin to see which flexes more. As a matter of fact, wouldn't the
buyer be much better off if all boats had the same test done? Maybe the French
Vega's that use a monster carbon rib that doesnt even touch the bottom of the
hull would turn out to be the stiffest.

If anyone  for some reason has close-up pictures of a new Empacher single, wing
or conventional, I'd love to see them.

Jose

 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by Ruscoe, Mark [LON40:7E58:EXCH » Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:43:49


Quote:
> What type of boat do you own ?

A (Raymond) Sims - I'm in the UK. The center section of the rigger is set
quite low across the shell, reducing the space above your feet, and then the
rigger rises up to the ends where the pins are attached. Some other makers'
designs have a flatter rigger which is set higher on the boat which is
better
from the point of view of getting your feet out of the shoes in an
emergency.

Quote:
> I have been told that there is a vertical movement while rowing, which you
> do not have with a conventionnal rigger.

I cant say that I've really noticed this while sculling.

Quote:
> Also, empacher wing rigger is not
> that popular and also reselling this type of  boat , say in  5 -6 years
> could be harder then reselling a conventional rigger, what you think?

I can't really comment on this.

Mark

 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by Trevor Chamber » Sat, 30 Jun 2001 19:32:44

Quote:


> > I have been told that there is a vertical movement while rowing, which you
> > do not have with a conventionnal rigger.

Duh? I know that any excessive vertical movement is a Bad Thing, and I'll ignore
Rob Waddell for the moment, but are you saying it is somehow attributable to
having a wing rigger, and it wouldn't be the same for the same athlete (ie
technique is constant) in a conventionally rigged boat? How, pray tell? I don't
buy that at all...

Quote:
> > Also, empacher wing rigger is not
> > that popular and also reselling this type of  boat , say in  5 -6 years
> > could be harder then reselling a conventional rigger, what you think?

Well, wing-rigged boats of all types seem to be more and more popular - I've
been aware when going onto the stakeboats to race this season that more boats
than not seem to be winged...so popularity could well be changing. I never liked
the original Empacher wing rigger but the carbon one looks a lot better.

My 2p

Trevor

Sudbury RC

 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by Carl Dougla » Sat, 30 Jun 2001 21:25:31


Quote:
>I also heard the wing rigger is not as stable,  apparently it bends a little
>( lateraly - up and down)  wich the conventional rigger doesn't move at all.
>But teh energy is better distributed to the boat with a wing rigger.

That's an interesting suggestion, often aired, but I hope you don't mind
if I say that I think it has absolutely no basis in fact.

The stroke energy can only be 'lost' in the rigger/boat/stretcher system
if there is some part of the intervening structure between pin & centre
of effort on the stretcher which flexes significantly, so as to absorb
measurable proportion of the work applied at the pin.

The point of attachment of the tension stay of a conventional rigger is
very close to the stretcher mounts, & all boats are extremely rigid over
such short distances.  The boat is also effectively incompressible at
the main shoulders/knees.  So the stroke forces go, without any loss,
directly along the tension stay and into the stretcher.

Indeed, I'd go further towards killing that particular fable by saying
that even with a forward-mounted wing, which is mounted some
1.2-metre/4ft ahead of the stretcher, there will be no material energy
losses within the intervening length of shell.

What can change that situation is if the rigger-to-stretcher connection
is capable of rotation (heels rotate downwards, or pin rotates forward)
under the stroke loads.  Some integral wing rigger/stretcher setups show
flexibility in the sax/gunwales mounting area under the unsupported
torsional loads from rigger & stretcher, permitting some stretcher
rotation.  And many tubular wing designs lack torsional stiffness in
comparison with a well-designed 2-stay conventionally-mounted rigger,
(permitting pin rotation & height variation unless much larger diameter
tubes are used).

Quote:
>it does not seem to be cathing on. Some companies like hudson  only make
>wing rigger.  It would be interesting to see if he still had conventional
>rigger if  most of its buyers would still buy wing rigger.
>Also teh wing rigger does leave more space and a lower seat because of teh
>absent rib

If the main shoulder/rib of the shell is built too narrow to allow the
seat to pass through as low as might be needed, that is a fault in the
shell, not an advantage of the wing rigger ;^)

And then there is the somewhat inconvenient size of the demounted wing
to consider.

Cheers -
Carl

PS  I'm always rather amused when a certain manufacturer actively
denigrates our AeRoWing riggers by claiming that they will somehow
damage his buttercup-yellow shells.
This an unfounded slur on our fine product.  And the fact that they use
it to try to bully buyers of their shells out of fitting AeRoWing
riggers displays structural engineering ignorance *and* admits how much
stiffer our riggers are than their own more expensive, & fragile,
products.
:-)
C

Carl Douglas Racing Shells        -
    Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: The Boathouse, Timsway, Chertsey Lane, Staines TW18 3JZ, UK

URLs:  www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)

 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by sue thoma » Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:41:00

A bow-mounted wing rigger, such as on the Fluidesign, doesn't interfere with
your feet at all.  On the Fluidesign, the rigger also acts as your
splashguard, and effectively so.  On this particular rigger, it's also
impossible to position your gates incorrectly.  As well, the rigger goes
with the flow ... tapering out from bow to stern, similar to an aircraft
wing.

I haven't noticed any vertical flex of the rigger, although this might be
different for a heavyweight male rower.  Have to admit I'm not really
looking for flex either, being too focused on what I'm doing.
................
sue

 
 
 

empacher riggers - someone can help ???

Post by Tim Grang » Mon, 02 Jul 2001 08:23:32


Quote:

>A bow-mounted wing rigger, such as on the Fluidesign, doesn't interfere with
>your feet at all.  On the Fluidesign, the rigger also acts as your
>splashguard, and effectively so.  On this particular rigger, it's also
>impossible to position your gates incorrectly.  As well, the rigger goes
>with the flow ... tapering out from bow to stern, similar to an aircraft
>wing.

Something we notices sitting at the start of the henley course yesterday
watching the single scullers race off, was two people both racing in
new sims boats, with a bow mounted wing rigger.  Both were making a very
odd sound on the recovery - a kind of wind-turbulence noise.  Anyone
else heard that or similar?

Tim